While universalism is a foundational principle of science, a growing stream of research finds that scientific contributions are evaluated differently depending on the gender of the author, with women tending to receive fewer citations relative to men, even for work of comparable quality. Strikingly, research also suggests that these gender gaps are visible even under blinded review, wherein the evaluator is not aware of the gender of the author. In this article, we consider whether gender differences in writing styles -- how men and women communicate their work -- may contribute to these observed gender gaps. We ground our investigation in a previously established framework for characterizing the linguistic style of written text, which distinguishes between two sets of features -- informational (i.e., features that emphasize facts) and involved (i.e., features that emphasize relationships). Using a large, matched sample of academic papers and patents, we find significant differences in writing style by gender; women use more involved features in their writing, a pattern that holds universally across fields. The magnitude of the effect varies across fields, with larger gender differences observed in the social sciences and arts humanities and smaller gaps in the physical sciences and technology. Subsequently, we show that gender differences in writing style may have parallels in reading preferences; papers and patents with more informational features tend to be cited more by men, while those with more involved features tend to be cited more by women, even after controlling for the gender of the author, inventor, and patent attorney. Our findings suggest that formal written text is not devoid of personal character, which could contribute to bias in evaluation, thereby compromising the norm of universalism.
翻译:虽然普遍性是科学的一项基本原则,但越来越多的研究发现,科学贡献的评价因作者的性别而不同,而科学贡献的评价也因作者的性别而不同,妇女往往得到比男子少的引文,即使是在相当质量的工作方面也是如此。令人印象深刻的是,研究还表明,这些性别差距即使在盲目审查中也是显而易见的,因为评价者并不了解作者的性别。在本篇文章中,我们考虑写作风格中的性别差异 -- -- 男女如何交流其工作 -- -- 是否会促成这些观察到的性别差距。我们的调查依据的是以前为书面文本语言风格定性而建立的框架,这种语言风格区分了两种特征 -- -- 信息(即强调事实的特征)和涉及的特征(即强调关系的特点)之间。我们发现,即使通过大量、匹配的学术论文和专利样本,这些性别差距也是显而易见的。我们发现,女性在写作文章时更多地采用参与的特征,这种模式在各领域普遍存在。影响的程度各不相同,在社会科学和艺术人文中观察到了更大的性别差异,在物理科学和技术中也存在较小差距。随后,我们指出,在阅读论文时,性别偏好的倾向往往比在写作文章后,而女性的特征往往倾向于采用比较接近。